History Main / AppealToNature

* ''Film/JurassicPark'': Malcolm states that bringing back dinosaurs is bad partly because that's going against natural selection. [[note]]While he may have had a point if he meant to refer to the ethics of suddenly introducing genetically altered megafauna to a region with existing wildlife, his actual point is just that "they had their chance", implying that dying from a meteor strike was due to a failure on their part[[/note]]

* This is often used with regard to social issues; for example, certain more extreme opponents of feminism contend that since the natural order for a great many species (particularly mammals) is for males to be dominant, women should not be granted the same rights as men. Apart from the numerous exceptions to this observation (such as the many matriarchal species of simians and the occasional RealLife OneGenderRace species that reproduce through parthenogenesis such as the whiptail lizard), this contention assumes that nature is what endows us with our rights. Yet historically, nature has never yet been demonstrated to provide any rights ''whatsoever'' to animals, let alone sexual equality. By this "logic" therefore, not only equality, but the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness would all have to be abolished and we would have to return to a Hobbesian state of total anarchy (in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short) in order to restore men to the "natural" social order in which such dominance arises. This is distinct from the idea of natural rights, which argues human rights exist as a result of our nature (similar to natural law theory above- there is often overlap). Part of the issue here is "natural" having multiple meanings as well, that can result in confusion. The same goes for ethical naturalism, which argues what's good is natural (which includes natural law theory). A rule of thumb is these views say the good is natural, though not ''everything'' natural is good, different from this fallacy.

* This is often used with regard to social issues; for example, certain more extreme opponents of feminism contend that since the natural order for a great many species (particularly mammals) is for males to be dominant, women should not be granted the same rights as men. Apart from the numerous exceptions to this observation (such as the many matriarchal species of simians and the occasional RealLife OneGenderRace species that reproduce through parthenogenesis such as the whiptail lizard), this contention assumes that nature is what endows us with our rights. Yet historically, nature has never yet been demonstrated to provide any rights ''whatsoever'' to animals, let alone sexual equality. By this "logic" therefore, not only equality, but the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness would all have to be abolished and we would have to return to a Hobbesian state of total anarchy (in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short) in order to restore men to the "natural" social order in which such dominance arises. This is distinct from the idea of natural rights, which argues human rights exist as a result of our nature (similar to natural law theory above-there is often overlap). Part of the issue here is "natural" having multiple meanings as well-that can result in confusion. The same goes for ethical naturalism, which argues what's good is natural (which includes natural law theory). A rule of thumb is these views say the good is natural, though not ''everything'' natural is good, different from this fallacy.

Compare AllNaturalSnakeOil, which is when advertising uses an Appeal to Nature.

* ''Film/TheresaAndAllison'': Allison says it's just nature when vampires kill humans for blood, asking if Theresa (who's not comfortable with this) whether she'd blame a lion who killed a lamb. Theresa objects that they aren't lions, but Allison says they aren't humans anymore either. However, it's shown blood from donations [[VegetarianVampire also works]], and they don't have to kill humans. Many just don't care not to, and others [[{{Sadist}} clearly enjoy it]].

* This is the reason for the Catholic church's official stance on birth control. They believe that every cell and organ has [[BecauseDestinySaysSo a divinely-ordained natural purpose]], and that the natural purpose of the reproductive organs is, well, [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin reproducing]], and that therefore having sex solely or primarily for pleasure (even as a married couple) "cheapens" the act because you're blocking the natural purpose of these organs artificially (it ''does'' concede that some couples may wish to limit the number of children they have or delay having children, and allows for "natural" methods of birth control, such as the Rhythm Method or the symptothermal method of "natural family planning," on the grounds that these fertility-awareness methods don't introduce artificial barriers or disrupt the natural menstrual cycle). It takes a dim view of IVF for partially the same reason (the others being the "extra" embryos produced in the process being left in the freezer indefinitely or destroyed, and the possibility of it being a slippery slope to DesignerBabies, which they're against as well). Another reason they oppose IVF is [[ThisIndexTouchesItself the sperm used is generally gained by masturbation]], which they oppose by the same theory (though other methods of gaining samples they approve of are also possible).

* This is the reason for the Catholic church's official stance on birth control. They believe that every cell and organ has [[BecauseDestinySaysSo a divinely-ordained natural purpose]], and that the natural purpose of the reproductive organs is, well, [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin reproducing]], and that therefore having sex solely or primarily for pleasure (even as a married couple) "cheapens" the act because you're blocking the natural purpose of these organs artificially (it ''does'' concede that some couples may wish to limit the number of children they have or delay having children, and allows for "natural" methods of birth control, such as the Rhythm Method or the symptothermal method of "natural family planning," on the grounds that these fertility-awareness methods don't introduce artificial barriers or disrupt the natural menstrual cycle). It takes a dim view of IVF for partially the same reason (the others being the "extra" embryos produced in the process being left in the freezer indefinitely or destroyed, and the possibility of it being a slippery slope to DesignerBabies, which they're against as well). Another reason they oppose IVF is the sperm used is generally gained by masturbation, which they oppose by the same theory (though other methods of gaining samples they approve of are also possible).

* The overuse and misuse of antibiotics, pesticides, and herbicides (and the resulting resistance and health and environmental effects) have led quite a few people to denouncing ''all'' use of them per the appeal to nature, right down to claiming a UsefulNotes/ConspiracyTheory that any or all of the above are part of a DepopulationBomb conspiracy. The problem is that while overuse and misuse needs to stop, to obliterate these products entirely (or allowing their continuing overuse and misuse to do just that by creating 100% resistance) ''will'' lead to TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt. Especially in regard to antibiotics -- these are the medications that turned such diseases as pneumonia, syphilis, and bubonic plague from terminal pandemic illnesses into quickly curable illnesses. In the same way, while many modern pesticides and their manufacture are bad for the environment, they are also a vital part in the control of disease-spreading, food-ruining, or venomous insect pests, especially for people and situations where setting up more natural methods of barriers and predators would be problematic. Ironically, organic farmers ''also'' use pesticides (made of "natural" toxins) which can be ''more'' harmful than synthetic ones since they are subject to far less testing. Additionally organic farming requires far more land use, meaning it could not possibly feed all the people necessary in today's world. The same arguments also apply to [=GMO=]s.

* This is the reason for the Catholic church's official stance on birth control. They believe that every cell and organ has [[BecauseDestinySaysSo a divinely-ordained natural purpose]], and that the natural purpose of the reproductive organs is, well, [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin reproducing]], and that therefore having sex solely or primarily for pleasure (even as a married couple) "cheapens" the act because you're blocking the natural purpose of these organs artificially (it ''does'' concede that some couples may wish to limit the number of children they have or delay having children, and allows for "natural" methods of birth control, such as the Rhythm Method or the symptothermal method of "natural family planning," on the grounds that these fertility-awareness methods don't introduce artificial barriers or disrupt the natural menstrual cycle). It takes a dim view of IVF for partially the same reason (the others being the "extra" embryos produced in the process being left in the freezer indefinitely or destroyed, and the possibility of it being a slippery slope to DesignerBabies, which they're against as well). Another reason they oppose IVF is the sperm used is generally gained by [[ADateWithRosiePalms masturbation]], which they oppose by the same theory (though other methods of gaining samples they approve of are also possible).

* ''Literature/{{Discworld}}'':
** In the novel ''Literature/CarpeJugulum'', King Verence is talked into drinking [[GargleBlaster brose]] after being told "It's got herbs in", on the assumption it must be healthy. He spends most of the remainder of the book foaming at the mouth and randomly attacking inanimate objects. This, however, turns out to be useful. It should be noted that brose is what the Nac mac Feegle, six-inch pictsies who can drink their weight in lamp oil with no ill effects, drink to get their spirits up before marching into battle.
** Similarly, the popular drinks Scumble (made of "mostly apples") and Splot containing such vaguely defined ingredients as "tree bark" and "naturally occurring mineral salts".
** Pratchett has a lot of fun with this trope; both Verence and his wife Magrat fall prey to it on a regular basis, usually for the worse. (In ''Literature/WitchesAbroad'', teetotaller and lightweight Magrat drinks a third of a bottle of absinthe because she vaguely recognizes it as involving wormwood, after which point she, Granny Weatherwax, and Nanny Ogg start calling it "herbal wine".)

** In ''Literature/TheFifthElephant'', when [[TyrantTakesTheHelm Acting-Captain]] Colon says he's opposed to "unnatural things" like Sonky's contraceptives, Lord Vetinari replies "You mean you eat your meat raw and sleep up a tree?"
** Vetinari also takes a dig at the Appeal to Nature in ''Literature/GoingPostal'': "Freedom may be the natural state of mankind, but so is sitting in a tree eating your dinner while it's still wriggling."
* In ''The Big Honey Hunt'' (the first of ''Literature/TheBerenstainBears'' series), the Bear family is out of honey. Mama Bear asks Papa Bear to buy some more, but he insists on gathering it the old fashioned way, bringing along his son to search for honey from a wild comb. In the process they anger many animals, including the beehive defending the honey they want. At the end, Papa and son settle for buying honey from the store.

* Creator/MarquisDeSade often had characters cite Nature having so much death to justify them committing murder, along with a larger proto-SocialDarwinist view with the "Right of the Strong" being crushing anyone weaker than they were.
* ''Literature/TheTravelersGate'': Enosh wants to release the [[SealedEvilInACan Incarnations]] to destroy the "unnatural" supremacy of Ragnarus, and bring everything back to the "natural order." They don't particularly care that millions will die when the [[PhysicalGod Incarnations]] rampage, and even want to help them after they are freed. [[spoiler:This isn't even the natural order. In truth, Incarnations are rare; usually whenever someone Incarnated, they would immediately return to their [[ElementalPlane Territory]] and become a part of it. On the rare occasions when Incarnations would remain in the real world and rampage, [[LightIsGood Elysian Travelers]] would fight them. A conspiracy created eight Incarnations at the same time for an unknown purpose, resulting in an Elysian Traveler Incarnating to stop them, and then a Ragnarus Traveler Incarnating to stop her. It was a Ragnarus Traveler who saved the world by sealing all the Incarnations (except Elysia, who had returned to her Territory on her own) beneath the [[BloodMagic Hanging Trees]]]].
* Many fantasy stories explain {{Necromancy}} and the undead as being evil as they "go against nature". Never mind by that logic one could claim wielding swords is evil, as it's not like you grow swords in a garden.
* ''Literature/{{Carmilla}}'': When Laura's father brings news of another peasant woman falling sick from the mysterious disease and tries to reassure Laura and Carmilla by asserting that even the disease must be within God's will, Carmilla in constrast puts forth her belief that the disease is natural, and that "all things in the heaven, in the earth, and under the earth act and live as Nature ordains". As it is strongly implied the disease of the peasant woman is caused by Carmilla feeding on her, Carmilla is transparently justifying her vampiric predation as a part of the natural order of things.

* ''Series/TheSarahJaneAdventures'', where aliens convince millions of people to drink a new energy soda [[spoiler:that contains alien parasites]] called "[[NamesToRunAwayFromReallyFast Bane]]" simply by claiming that Bane is "organic" (and by extension "healthy").
* ''Series/{{Eureka}}'' has an episode where everyone is becoming dumber, and the supposedly-a-genius farmer doesn't think the additives she's using are bad, because they are "organic"...In a town of super-geniuses, granted lacking in common sense sometimes, this seemed rather glaring in its stupidity.

* In ''Series/CosmosASpaceTimeOdyssey'', Neil deGrasse Tyson points out that an appeal to nature was used to justify using the dangerous gasoline additive tetraethyllead, or "leaded" gasoline. Part of the campaign General Motors used was simply pointing out that lead was a naturally occurring element in the environment. Likewise, paint companies would resort to similar appeals. Long before the '60s, lead's toxicity was well-established to scientists, but the public outcry wasn't there. To a lay person, the appeal to nature could be convincing. A person with even a modest amount of knowledge of chemistry could say, "As are arsenic, mercury, and uranium; should I be ingesting those, too?" To this day, the cost of lead poisoning is staggering. A study available on the web at the website of the NIH of the United States puts the return on investment of eliminating lead at [[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2717145/ about 1700-2100%]]. Links between lead levels and criminality (controlling for other factors, such as income, neighborhood, and race), lower IQ, poorer school performance, and increased medical expenditures are uncontroversial in modern medical science. This fallacious argument to keep using lead led to terrible consequences we're still paying for today.
* Discussed on ''Series/AdamRuinsEverything'', with regard to breastfeeding vs. baby formula. One of Emily's friends berates her for using formula to feed her baby (who wouldn't latch at the hospital), saying that formula is "baby poison," and also that breastfeeding is the best or only way to bond with baby. Emily's mother-in-law, Patti, with the help of a researcher, shows her that formula is ''not'' toxic (as long as you use clean water and sterile bottles), it saved the lives of many babies whose mothers couldn't breastfeed, and that there's no ''conclusive'' evidence that using formula will adversely affect the baby's IQ or well-being...or that breastfeeding makes a difference in that regard. She and Adam also explain that breastfeeding is not the only way to bond with baby, and that the "love hormone" (oxytocin) is released while doing ''plenty'' of other things than breastfeeding (even things we might consider vices). The researcher explains that the view of formula as "baby poison" goes back to TheSeventies, when [[MegaCorp Nestle]] was marketing formula in poor countries, where clean water was not available, which led to the formula being contaminated by the dirty water, and in turn, a spike in infant death from diseases and parasites. (Not helping matters was the fact that these impoverished mothers were diluting the formula to help it last longer, because it was expensive for them, which led to babies dying of malnutrition as well.) This led to conspiracy theories, and the belief that formula is unsafe because it's artificial.
* In the ''Series/StarTrekEnterprise'' episode "[[Recap/StarTrekEnterpriseS01E13DearDoctor Dear Doctor]]", Doctor Phlox argues against curing a disease affecting the Valakians on grounds that the existence of the Valakian species is [[GoalOrientedEvolution holding back the evolution]] of the Menk species on the same planet. He argues to Captain Archer that they should "let nature take its course". For icing on the cake, Archer's closing monologue in effect claims this incident as the origin of the PrimeDirective.

* In ''VideoGame/TelepathTactics'', the anarchist Zimmer tries to invoke this after learning that [[PoliceAreUseless the local constabulary were paid off by their opponents]], but is immediately debunked by [[ScienceHero Phoebe]].
-->'''Zimmer:''' But to be honest, I prefer it this way: individuals duking it out like nature intended, instead of an unaccountable state picking winners and losers...\\
'''Phoebe:''' (''sighing heavily'') Nature does not have intent, Zimmer; it is nothing more than a series of systems. Civilization is no less "natural" than running alone, naked and delirious, through the woods.

* ''WebVideo/JonTron'' pokes fun at this when ripping on ''Creator/GwynethPaltrow's'' quotes and "natural cure" products which have been criticized as lacking scientific basis and outright labelled harmful and misleading by medical professionals, particularly her claim that "We're human beings and the sun is the sun -- How can it be bad for you? I don't think anything that is natural can be bad for you." It cuts to Jon doing a ThousandYardStare to ''VideoGame/SuperMarioWorld'' music, sounds of people screaming, and a ''MASSIVE'' list of about 50 natural things that are dangerous, bad for you, or outright deadly scrolls by, ending with '''THE SUN'''.

* PlayedForLaughs a few times on ''Westernanimation/SouthPark'':

* ''Film/TheBlackStork'': Dr. Dickey argues that God intended for the Leffingwell child to be born defective, and God intended for him to die.

The [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature Appeal To Nature,]] also [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy erroneously]] called the Naturalistic Fallacy, involves assuming something is good or correct on the basis that it happens in nature, is bad because it does not, or that something is good because it "comes naturally" in some way. This is fallacious because it assumes the "natural" to be an ideal state without argument, effectively using it as a synonym for "desirable" or "normal." This is a form of [[FourTermsFallacy equivocation fallacy]], because "natural" can mean "consonant to a thing's nature, proper, fitting"; things that happen on their own do not have to fit that definition.

* Many products are advertised as having "all-natural sugar" (or, equivalently, "no added sugar"), as if the human metabolism can somehow distinguish sugars by source.
** Among the products which advertise themselves as 'all-natural' and 'no added sugar' is ''sugar cane juice''.

* One of the {{Parody Commercial}}s in ''Captain Proton and the Planet of Lesbians'' advertises "Radio-Active Water" for killing germs and "[[TheLoinsSleepTonight restoring your youthful vigor]]".
-->You might ask: is radio-activity dangerous to my health? Be assured that radium is not a synthetic drug or medicine but an entirely natural element, present in many hot springs famous for their recuperative properties.[[note]]This is based on ''[[TruthInTelevision real]]'' commercials from the early 1900s (until people started dying, it was touted for its alleged healing properties, though you'd think the fact radium's discoverers Pierre and Marie Currie had died from radiation poisoning would've stopped that...).[[/note]]
* Chillingly lampshaded by the narrator in ''Fanfic/PokemonStrangledRed'' when, directing Steven to Lavender Town to resurrect his Charizard, Miki, he sees an NPC say:

* Inverted in ''Fanfic/RocketshipVoyager''. Because FutureFoodIsArtificial, Captain Janeway concludes that natural food is good for an occasional treat but not healthy in the long run.

* In ''Film/{{Troll 2}}'', an evil witch is able to convince [[IdiotBall someone]] to drink a steaming green broth that has just turned someone else into green goo because "it is made from vegetable extracts".
* In ''Film/JurassicPark'', Malcolm states that bringing back dinosaurs is bad partly because that's going against natural selection. [[note]]While he may have had a point if he meant to refer to the ethics of suddenly introducing genetically altered megafauna to a region with existing wildlife, his actual point is just that "they had their chance", implying that dying from a meteor strike was due to a failure on their part[[/note]]
* In ''Film/{{Shrooms}}'', Holly and Troy believe that taking magic mushrooms will be fine because they are 'all natural': unlike Bluto's steroids.
* In ''Film/TheBlackStork'', Dr. Dickey argues that God intended for the Leffingwell child to be born defective, and God intended for him to die.

* This is often used with regard to social issues; for example, certain more extreme opponents of feminism contend that since the natural order for a great many species (particularly mammals) is for males to be dominant, women should not be granted the same rights as men. Apart from the numerous exceptions to this observation (such as the many matriarchal species of simians and the occasional RealLife OneGenderRace species that reproduce through parthenogenesis such as the whiptail lizard), this contention assumes that nature is what endows us with our rights. Yet historically, nature has never yet been demonstrated to provide any rights ''whatsoever'' to animals, let alone sexual equality. By this "logic" therefore, not only equality, but the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness would all have to be abolished and we would have to return to a Hobbesian state of total anarchy (in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short) in order to restore men to the "natural" social order in which such dominance arises. This is distinct from the idea of natural rights, which argues human rights exist as a result of our nature (similar to natural law theory above-there is often overlap). Part of the issue here is "natural" having multiple meanings as well-that can result in confusion. The same goes for ethical naturalism, which argues what's good is natural (which include natural law theory). A rule of thumb is these views say the good is natural, though not ''everything'' natural is good, different from this fallacy.

* This is often used with regard to social issues; for example, certain more extreme opponents of feminism contend that since the natural order for a great many species (particularly mammals) is for males to be dominant, women should not be granted the same rights as men. Apart from the numerous exceptions to this observation (such as the many matriarchal species of simians and the occasional RealLife OneGenderRace species that reproduce through parthenogenesis such as the whiptail lizard), this contention assumes that nature is what endows us with our rights. Yet historically, nature has never yet been demonstrated to provide any rights ''whatsoever'' to animals, let alone sexual equality. By this "logic" therefore, not only equality, but the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness would all have to be abolished and we would have to return to a Hobbesian state of total anarchy (in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short) in order to restore men to the "natural" social order in which such dominance arises. This is distinct from the idea of natural rights, which argues human rights exist as a result of our nature (similar to natural law theory above-there is often overlap). Part of the issue here is "natural" having [[YouKeepUsingThatWord multiple meanings]] as well-that can result in confusion. The same goes for ethical naturalism, which argues what's good is natural (which include natural law theory). A rule of thumb is these views say the good is natural, though not ''everything'' natural is good, different from this fallacy.

The [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature Appeal To Nature]], also [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy erroneously]] called the Naturalistic Fallacy, involves assuming something is good or correct on the basis that it happens in nature, is bad because it does not, or that something is good because it "comes naturally" in some way. This is fallacious because it assumes the "natural" to be an ideal state without argument, effectively using it as a synonym for "desirable" or "normal." This is a form of [[FourTermsFallacy equivocation fallacy]], because "natural" can mean "consonant to a thing's nature, proper, fitting"; things that happen on their own do not have to fit that definition.

* A famous example from mathematics is Giovanni Saccheri's attempt to prove the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_postulate parallel postulate]]. In his book, ''Euclid Freed of Every Flaw'', Saccheri assumed the postulate was false and tried to derive a contradiction. Instead, he derived results that got stranger and stranger (but remained logically consistent), finally concluding that they were "repugnant to the nature of straight lines". Saccheri didn't know it, but he was developing what we now call hyperbolic geometry -- a fruitful field of study that just doesn't work the same way Euclidean geometry does.

* War is often said to be bad because it's a human invention, which isn't really true. Also not human inventions: agriculture (ants and termites, among others), division of labor (multiple species), language (disputed-multiple species), ownership (disputed-multiple species), tool use (apes, octopuses, crows, and others), or... well, actually, we didn't invent a lot. We mostly just do a lot of things other species do, but do it on a grander scale. What makes humans, or perhaps even just certain cultures, unique is the method in which we adapt and pass information on, forming increasingly complex societies that have greater ecological impacts. We didn't even invent paper. Wasps did that. We did, however, invent ''writing'' on paper -- and writing in general, to be perfectly blunt. Wasps mostly just live in their paper, which incidentally includes crapping on it (if you've ever seen a wasp's nest, you might notice black liquid dripping from it. That's wasp poop. [[BrainBleach You're welcome]]!).

* The transphobic argument that because things like gender confirmation surgery and hormone replacement therapy are manmade and cannot change the sex chromosomes you were born with or allow you to have the reproductive functions of your self-identified gender, trans people are participating in a harmful delusion or mutilating themselves as a denial of their own biological reality. In truth, it has been shown that being trans is naturally occurring (with apparent epigenetic causes) and biological sex has been found to be [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change far more of a complicated spectrum than was previously known]]. There are even animals capable of changing their biological sex later in life. So such arguments (even in regards to what's biological or otherwise natural) don't stand up.

* Wiki/TVTropes:

* This is often used with regard to social issues; for example, certain more extreme opponents of feminism contend that since the natural order for a great many species (particularly mammals) is for males to be dominant, women should not be granted the same rights as men. Apart from the numerous exceptions to this observation (such as the many matriarchal species of simians and the occasional RealLife OneGenderRace species that reproduce through parthenogenesis such as the whiptail lizard), this contention assumes that nature is what endows us with our rights. Yet historically, nature has never yet been demonstrated to provide any rights ''whatsoever'' to animals, let alone sexual equality. By this "logic" therefore, not only equality, but the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness would all have to be abolished and we would have to return to a Hobbesian state of total anarchy (in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short) in order to restore men to the "natural" social order in which such dominance arises.

* Some hardcore vegetarians/vegans argue against dairy because it's not natural to drink a cow's milk, and usually bolster this argument by saying "Why don't we drink horse/dog/pig/rat/whatever milk, then?" Putting aside that people in many cultures ''do'' consume milk from larger ungulates like horses and goats, the argument fundamentally misunderstands why cow's milk is the go-to: Bovines are very big animals and usually very docile, meaning they are easy to milk and produce a very large yield per head. Even if it were delicious and packed with nutrients, who the hell would go to the trouble to milk a dog or a rat instead?